343Bhp

<center><img src="http://www.ilpistone.com/downloads/sa/5.jpg"></center><p>The thing to note in the pic above is that the CL65 has 735 lb/ft of torque vs the Ferraris 432 lb/ft. Weight difference isn't significant &amp; the CL65 has more HP as well.

BUT, in the rolling runs it loses EVERY SINGLE RUN to the less powerful, less torquey but shorter geared Ferrari. Why?

So let's take another 2 cars to see if this phenomenon is a once off. I was gonna' post a whole thing with links to R&amp;D &amp; Motortrend that tested the C55. Seems the M3 was quicker over the 1/4 mile according to both mags. But then I realised somebody will always have reasons to dispute that. But check it out anyway.

EVO in the UK, Sport Auto in Germany, &amp; basically all over the world M3 has quicker 1/4 mile times.

But, I hear you say, that's an auto against a manual (which is not fair on a standing start) &amp; the C55 surely traps higher. Well NOT! R&amp;T &amp; Mototrend got the M3 6MT with higher trap speeds.

BUT, here's the scary part. Sport Auto did a throrough test of the C55. BTW, Sport Auto is one the best magazines in the world &amp; the drivers are of the calibre of former Nurburgring record holders.

Attached is a link to Track-challenge where the Sport Auto test between the 2 is compiled. Note the rolling runs. There were 8 rolling runs done, all starting at 50mph. M3 WAS QUICKER IN EVERY SINGLE RUN!

C55 must have seen sick you say. We know it can't be driver error in an auto. But in the standing starts the C55 was quick. In fact its only 0.2 slower than the M3 to 125mph. C55 is definitely running to spec.

Now what's a revelation to me is the 50-112mph runs. 1st one in 4th gear. M3 is 2.2 seconds quicker. Then they put both cars in 5th gear.

Bear in mind that at 50mph in 5th gear the M3 is at 2100rpm. Surely the 5.5 V8 with 375 lb/ft with crush the puny little torque-less M3 in a run up to 112mph if the M3 starts at 2000rpm (way out of the 6000-8000rpm powerband).

But wait, the gap is almost 3 seconds. M3 pulls away on all rolling runs.

Here's why. A small little thing called gearing. As I'm sure most of you know, a gear ratio is a form of torque multiplication. You effectively get more torque to the wheels with a shorter gear &amp; you are higher up the rev-band than a longer-geared car.

Now, I now some of you have seen otherwise, but these are the facts. If you beat some other guy, chances are you beat the driver not the car. If an M3 driver knows what he's doing, he will downshift &amp; wait for you at 6000rpm &amp; not be stuck in the wrong gear.

So let's have some constructive discussions as to how this happened in 2 totally different scenarios &amp; let's not start with the usual flaming.<ul><li><a href="http://www.track-challenge.com/comparison1d_e.asp?Car1=2&amp;Car2=75">Sport Auto M3 vs C55</a></li></ul>

Ash

..however...I think there are some other factors to consider. Note how the cl65 catches the ferrari in the higher speeds. I think the biggest problem is traction for this car. With the ridiculous amount of low end torque, the traction control will either choke the engine, or the wheels will spin. The ferrari with its relatively lower torque can put the power down and get going. The fact that the cl can catch up and pass and put major ground/time on the ferrari by 200 km/h shows the extra power it has.

Now, gearing certainly helps, but during the in-gear acceleration runs, I think there is another factor at play. There is boost lag and torque converter slip on initial throttle application for the cl. The ferrari being a fire-breathing NA engine, has instantaneous response which gets it going immediately. The CL not only has lag and has to build boost, but will have some torque converter slip until it locks up. These two combined kill the in-gear times because once everything is spooled up and locked, the target speed has been almost reached and the test is over (we're talking a few seconds for these runs, not much time for the cl to catch up).

A contrasting example is when the v8 s4 was compared with the m3. There is no lag/lock up issue here, and the higher torque s4 showed better acceleration numbers for in-gear tests becasue the m3 was out of its power band. Given enough of a distance/time, the m3 would probably keep up and slowly catch up to the s4, but these in-gear tests are relatively short, and the jump one gets at the start of the test is what tells it all.

Ash

343Bhp

than the C55 against the M3. I don't think the gearing is as long. But it just goes to show that all these stories are about C32/55 pulling M3's on the highway are just driver related.

343Bhp

max torque is. On all the runs it was on boost. I agree that traction might have been an issue but not on all the runs.

At higher speeds I think its the extra hp of the CL that takes it toll, not the torque.

No More B5 S4

Ahhhh, you don't drive a U.S. Spec M3. Aren't the Euro specs a bit faster?

JDBlueAudiS4

how many roads in the US are straight? Although a track isnt like the real world, its a lot closer then a 1/4 mile track. Although one bad thing about tracks is they have to much driver skill to take into account where the 1/4 mile track only has the launch really to worry about.<ul><li><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/powerlaps/">Top Gear Lap Times</a></li></ul>

JDBlueAudiS4

cause the M3 stock has a top speed of 155 where the S4 can sit at 175+ all day stock.

JDBlueAudiS4

Shouldnt you be posting this on the MB forums?

No More B5 S4

+10bhp, is your E-Spec M3 gearing more aggressive?

343Bhp

It is widely accepted down under here that an M3 walks a C32, even on the highway. It's pretty close, mind you. But the M3 has the slight edge provided he's a goo driver.

We have 343bhp here stock, but I doubt that woul make much difference. We also have more torque &amp; better low down torque (I think).